tv Morning Joe MSNBC July 9, 2012 3:00am-6:00am PDT
tat the top of the show we asked why are you awake. john tower, on his way to summer camp today has some answers. johnny? >> i have to leave soon. lori writes, wonderful mike barnicle greets me this monday. who could ask for more? >> isn't that nice. anything else? >> i have jonas, he writes, when did msnbc buy the writes to re-air "golden girls" episodes? >> that's extremely harsh. i mean we're trying to honor earnest borgnine by my presence, died at 95, i'm 93, i have a couple more years to go.
thanksp. "morning joe" starts right now. >> good morning, everyone. it is monday, july 9th. welcome to "morning joe." with us on set this morning, we have msnbc contributor mike barnicle, walking in the room, slightly drunk after doing "way too early." i think it's a little too much on him. you can tell by his voice. former foreign policy adviser to the bush administration, dan senor is here. hello. >> how are you. >> do you want to do "way too early". >> mike is doing it. >> i'm not sure he should. visiting professor at nyu, former democratic congressman harold ford jr. is here. do you want to do "way too early" tomorrow. >>? >> do it tomorrow. >> mike, want to skip out on doing "way too early". >> i skip out doing it when i do it. >> i'm trying to give you a day off. former treasury official and
"morning joe" economic analyst steve rattner is with us. rattner. >> good morning, mika. >> still want to call you a financier. >> can you acknowledge one thing? >> yes. >> you did not listen. same tie day. >> i know. >> got the memo. >> democrat thing. >> what's wrong with you two? >> we were e-mailing which tie should we wear? >> difference between the two. >> what is it? >> you paid for yours. >> i didn't. i didn't. mine was a -- mine was a birthday gift. >> he paid a lot of money too, right, barnicle. >> okay. we got a lot to talk about. joe is off. he'll be back this week. where is willie? is he doing "today"? >> summer camp. >> he's on vacation, alex says. he's allowed. a new issue to get to. an old one being revived by democrats and republicans and the president and i hope this time he follows through on it. today the president will push for a one-year extension of the bush-era tax cuts for people
making under $250,000 according to the "new york times." the move comes on the heels of friday's disappointing jobs report which we'll get to with rattner here. as house republicans pushed to permanently extend the bush tax cuts for the middle and upper class. yesterday, obama senior adviser robert gibbs framed tax strategy as one of the key differences between the president and mitt romney. >> we know what tax breaks and tax cuts for the wealthy and financial regulations off of wall street mean, mean economic calamity, versus a vision where we add jobs and build out of the middle class, people take responsibility and work hard and get ahead. that's what we need. >> we will have robert gibbs on the show later this morning to talk to him about this. harold, i'll start with you in terms of political strategy, is this a winning one for the president given the differences between the candidates? >> politically, it puts taxes back in the forefront, obviously, allows the president to further frame this as a
middle -- election about middle class values and who's best poised and positioned to represent those values. if you're the american public, a voter, this is the same old conversation we've had over the last two years. you'll listen to both sides criticize one another, listen to the republicans say if you don't extend it for all you hurt the job creators, hurt those who invest. democrats will make the argument is this is about the middle class. if you're arguing the issue you'd much rather argue for the middle class, a small win for the president politically, but probably opens the door for the president and his team to compromise perhaps on something more than what they're putting forward, more than what they're expected or anticipated to put forward today. they may offer some reductions in the capital gains and the dividend tax and even some relief for higher earners, not going back all the way to the 39 number but compromising. >> it emphasizes the division, the struggling middle class, might be an opportunity for the president and democrats to,
steve rattner, look at the republicans as obstructionists. it is about jobs. we've had some disappointing jobs reports out. what would this do in terms of jobs and could the republicans argue it could hurt job growth? >> certainly argue that in the short run cutting taxes will add jobs. i think that's a sort of fundamental tentative basic economic theory. all of this is taking place against a much bigger backdrop of two things. first what harold talked about, this is the politics. a lot of political theater where democrats are trying to stake out their view of the world. republicans stake out their view. the other large backdrop is the if is call cliff coming at the end of the year. none of what we're talking about today is going to happen in the short run. it's going to get wrapped into a large debate at the end of the year how we avoid the fiscal cliff and taxes will play a large part in that equation. >> dan, hit me with it. what are the republicans who are going to be in congress trying to repeal obama care, which is
not going to happen, how do they get around looking like they want to say no to everything and get in the way of progress? >> they're putting forward a number of votes between now and the august recess. so people could call these votes political but they are substantive votes on real issues that will define the election. >> like the disclosure act? >> like some of these tax reform issues. >> like obamacare. talk to me. >> mitt romney has said if he's elected president on day one he's going to do certain things like issuing executive order to allow states to get out of implementation of obamacare, appealing the keystone pipeline. he's talked about specific things he will do and these are things that president obama is against doing. so, you know, the campaign over the last few days has been interesting to watch because it's been a lot of character assassination and attacks about all sorts of issues that seem to be distractions from the campaign. the reality is, president obama and governor romney have two very different views on some very big issues. they're going to be debated in this election and there are
going to be some votes in congress now asking members of congress on both sides of the aisles to stake out where they stand. >> mike barnicle? >> harold, why do i think that the fairness factor on the tax code, might eventually overlap every other issue, economic issue, that we're talking about with the exception of employment? the fairness factor. the middle class, you know, you've been taking it, been getting hosed on the tax code, rich people getting away with a lot, boom, boom, boom, just the fairness factor? >> the fair ntz issue, i think, has worked effectively for a period of time. i'm not convinced, though, that it overtakes all of the other things. i think the jobs issue, which you touched on at the outset of the question is more important and the question becomes, if your tax rate will stay where it is are you willing to vote for the president again if he says i'm going to take on the wealthiest in the country? look, again, that argument, i've never been a fan of that politics and that kind of approach. i happen to think that this argument --
>> why? do you think -- >> if the 99% and 1% argument always worked, we democrats would win every election. i'm not that great at math but 99 beats 1 every time. we're an aspirational society. people want to have more. middle-class americans don't believe the wealthiest should get away without paying tax or deductions and loopholes. if you offer what the president is going to offer and i look forward to them doing that this week, they should offer a broader reform package as well. the short term, do this to avoid on what steve touched on the fiscal cliff issues and let's reform this tax code in a broader, more comprehensive pro-growth way. >> what this would do, if they at least hit the people over $250,000 a year, it would bring in, i don't know, $850 billion over ten years, not that much in the big picture, but at least feeds into the republicans' arguments -- >> what does that do to economic growth, where we are today? >> that is the question i had? >> $850 billion actually a huge
amount of money in the context we're talking about. that would be a big -- >> the equivalent of the stimulus in february of 2009. >> compared to the fact that mitt romney is arguing about this tax mandate thing, which is a $7 billion item, this is $850 billion. this is real money. >> real money. >> that's why the president is proposing this. we have to do something about the budget deficit. whether we implement this on january 1st or a bit later talk about in the context of economic growth. taxes have to go up on the wealthy to help -- can i say one last thing? >> yeah. >> this house republican proposal is a house republican proposal. mitt romney has another tax proposal to cut taxes 20% across the board for everybody and that has yet to be debated in the political context. that's going to be -- >> and closing loopholes. it's a broadening of the tax code. >> he's refused to specify any of so far and this is all going to be -- >> but on the extension of the bush tax cut jus six democratic senators now for extension of the bush tax cuts. >> all of the bush tax cuts?
>> well -- >> four of the six are up for re-election, two are retiring. >> they're not for it. >> president clinton has been clear -- >> they're considering it. being pressured. >> president clinton has come out for extension of the bush tax cuts. what's going on here? this is not just -- >> it's politics. >> republicans on the wrong side of fairness? >> go ahead. >> mike. and then i have two other guys that can talk about this. >> if the president, if this administration has three more monthly jobs reports like last week's jobs report, this is going to -- nobody's going to be caring about what we're talking about here. >> i would agree. >> look, remember, we've had a replay of this. in 2010 we argued this, might party, my team argued we should extend tax cuts those making below 250 and those above should pay higher. we didn't win the election. there was health care, the tax issues, jobs issues. the tax fairness rather and didn't prevail for us. the concern i have is what a lot of incumbent democrats who will
face tough re-elections. how do you differentiate between the two when you have a barrage of ads, barrage of criticism coming your way during an economic slow down you want to be a member of the tax raising team. >> does this issue help differentiate between the two? two other gentlemen i think could probably take on each other on this. here, though, to talk about something they're working together on. >> no, no, no. >> yes. >> not interested in anybody working together. >> we'll get to them. we'll slip it in there. >> fighting down the street. you guys have gone soft on us. >> on "morning joe." >> from washington joining us now -- >> morning love. >> republican governor of mississippi and former chairman of the republican national committee, haley barbour and chairman of green tech automotive and former dnc chairman and i wonder if he's running for governor, terry mcauliffe. they're working together. >> good morning. >> on a project to help create jobs which will get to in just a moment. but first, who should i let go first, haley or terry? this is a hard choice. >> let the chairman go first. >> he's got the governor title.
>> that's true. haley barbour, explain to me why tax cuts on the rich can't be rescinded, at least temporarily? >> we're in a global -- the united states is in a global battle for capital and for labor. yet we have the highest corporate tax rate in the world. and the obama administration's part of obamacare is increasing the capital gains tax by 25%. now, if we're trying to attract capital sohire more people, improve benefits, how do we think -- where do you think the $850 billion you are going to talk about is going to go? it's going to go to the government instead of going for more employees, higher wages, and for expanding the economy. that's pretty simple. >> it is? i'm not sure it's that simple i won't argue with you. i'll let terry. point, counter-point or would you agree with haley barbour on this? >> haley and i are in agreement
on the global economy. the reason we're sitting here today, as you know on friday, i unveiled and rolled out our first car. i went to china two years ago, bought their most advanced electric car company, moved it to the united states of america and on friday we had 1,000 folks at the factory opening, governor barbour, former president clinton. a great rollout. we got to get back to manufacturing in this country. we can't become a service economy. we have to make things here in america again. we're making cars and we're shipping them off to denmark. a great american success story, but it took governor barbour and myself working together. this wasn't a political issue. we've invested hundreds of millions of dollars in this company. he as a governor he wanted jobs, i wanted a great work environment and incentives to make me make money. we came together. how do we get this country moving forward together? we have to get this partisan politics allowing other nations to move ahead of us. i'm competing against china every single day. i actually went there, bought a company, moved it here, now made by u.s. workers. we have to get in the game here
in the united states of america in this partisan fighting that we're having here in washington, right now is not doing anything to create jobs. we need our economic policy that's going to incentivize guys like me to create jobs here in the united states of america and compete in that global economy. i'm here with governor barbour because he had the best deal of all the 50 states, mississippi said, i want manufacturing. and our team went on it. >> when he says, mississippi offered the best deal, almost every single thing in our incentives were tax incentives, tax credits if they're successful, then we reduce their taxes. that speaks volumes to the question you asked me to start this section of the show. >> interesting. mike barnicle? >> governor barbour, as you know this is cable, so let's get back to contentiousness, okay. >> they won't do it. they just won't do it. >> i mean we've had enough of you and terry being best friends and everything like that. >> why don't you just kiss each other. >> take me into the romney campaign and defend romney's position on the affordable care act, obamacare, whatever you
want to call it, it's almost the exact same bill passed by the massachusetts legislature, championed by then governor romney. take me into the campaign. how does he go back and forth on this deal? >> well look, let's start off by recognizing something. every state in the united states has mandatory car insurance. if you own an automobile, you have to insure it. because states have that power under the united states constitution. that's part of the police power. the federal government doesn't have that power because the founding fathers had already had one king and they didn't want another one. they didn't want to give the federal government that power and they didn't. so, the fact that somebody mandates some requirement in a state, is not unusual at all. now, we wouldn't have it in mississippi when they passed it in massachusetts, i said f that's what massachusetts wants, if that works for massachusetts, that's their business. we don't want it. and i think the vast, vast
majority of states don't want it. but it's very clearly within the realm of the powers of massachusetts and frankly, a lot of us believe different states would be the best ways to look at the different alternatives for reforming health care, raer than trying to impose this top down solution. we've already got 13,000 pages of regulation. >> he's good. >> saying it's going to go to 40. >> how good are you, governor? >> always been good. he had me when he was talking about certain senators that he thought should be in the republican party -- >> look at mcauliffe. he's just dying. >> it's a hostage video. >> terry, do you have a point you want to make? i wanted to share something about the initiative the two of you were working on. >> no. >> i was just going to say about our initiative, governor chief executives we get elected to get the job done. you know, i'm a republican governor, i had a democrat legislature almost my whole time as governor, seven years, both houses, one year democrat, house
alone, terry is a democratic national chairman. but look, he brought to mississippi jobs, very innovative company, in a sector that we're focused on, automotive. also energy which is one of our prominent sectors that we're trying to grow in mississippi. my job is to get the job done. >> yeah. >> you know, we need more of that in the united states rather than how can we be more contentious. >> on that note, terry mcauliffe, are you going to get elected to get the job done? are you running for governor of virginia? >> well -- i've just opened this big plant on friday. i'm working on a big wood pellett operation we're trying to do in virginia. i'm trying to do what i said last time. i ran on a campaign of big ideas, sort of the things we need to do. if you don't want to vote for me, don't. they didn't. i went back to business. it's all right. had a great time running. what i think the important thing is, of all this comes off to, we have to have job creation back
the america. look at the joblessness in america today and look at the loss of manufacturing. that's what we've got to bring back. i think as i say, we will now by the end of next year have 1,000 new employees directly in mississippi, the indirect and induce is about 7,000 jobs that are impacted. i want to do this in other states. >> yeah. >> the governors got to be able to lay it out, i have to make money, good for the state. everyone is so intrigued. the press this weekend, how could haley barbour and terry mcauliffe be together? that's not the point. what's the best deal for mississippi and my company. we ought to be out buying american products and support american workers in a bipartisan way. that's what counts in this country. >> the thousand new employees forecast over the next year or so you mentioned are they going to have health care? >> they do. we have a great benefit package. we have about 450 people in mississippi and we -- the first plant opened. we'll roll off one car per hour.
i know you have a couple pictures of the cars up there now. a $60 million plant under construction that we have that we're building in tunica, mississippi, and third for the company, very unique, no one goes to china and buys manufacturing and brings it back, we're also building a mega plant of 18 million square foot plant in china, the deal we negotiated which no one else has done, all the parts will be made in the united states of america by u.s. workers and shipped to china. we're trying to do things revolutionary, different than we've done. the company has no debt, all with private investor money, no federal government money. we can do this. we can beat these countries around the world. i'm sick and tired of them coming in here, stealing our technology and stealing our jobs. we have to go after them. if it's our technology we ought to build it here with u.s. hands and sell it. that's what is going to get this country going. >> terry, you know these electric car companies have typically been -- at least historically been successful on the coasts, they get buyers in
california and areas near new york, people buy them as a second car. part of this is sort of what they call in the business rage anxiety, people are nervous about the electric cars, they go out of range, not a gas station than can service them every mile, they don't want to rely on these cars. a company called better place out of israel you may be familiar with, that is doing business in denmark, building chain stations across israel, to deal with the infrastructure, range anxiety. how does my car deal with that? >> yeah. others is a different model. i'll be honest, not easy starting a car company, not easy starting one in the middle of a recession, not easy to go to china and buy one and bring it back. we've turbo charged the difficulty but seems to be working. we're making them and selling them. we're selling these cars, different models for $18,000, called neighborhood electric vehicles. get 115 miles to a charge. they go 45 miles an hour. i live in mcclain, virginia, i drive to tysons corner to my office every day. it's three miles.
perfect, drive up, back. >> dorothy, she goes to downtown mcclain, buys things, brings it back. it's a two seater. but people if you get 115 miles, i tell the people, you don't get in the car if the big globe says you have 40 miles to go, not going to drive 60. they're run around cars. for $18,000, i think it will get people -- great for new york city. islands, military bases. domino's did a partnership, we unveiled the domino's car the other day. their franchisees are buying to deliver their pizzas in electric vehicles. say buy a domino's pizza because you're creating u.s. jobs, jobs in mississippi. we all got to be working together on this global economy. >> i'm not sure i would buy that, but that's a good sell. >> is he going to pay for that time? >> terry, personally, i think that you should run and if you run for governor, you would win. i would be willing to bet you a bottle of vodka which we could share on the set which you'd have to buy if you won, fair? >> in fairness, when we ended
the primaries a lot of people got a real charge out of it. you asked me to bring the last primaries, down in puerto rico, i brought it back and give you credit, let's open it and celebrate the end of the primaries and you had the first shot and joe ant i weren't going to let a woman drink alone. i'll bring the next bottle and see where we go. i'll make a deal. if i can get governor barbour to come out for me that would be a big deal. >> is it true you went along with this mcauliffe deal to get him to stop talking? >> depends on whether it is successful. >> i love it. two of our favorites former governor barbour and terry mcauliffe. thank you for joining us. good luck with the initiative, with the company, with my car. >> thank you. >> coming up walter isaacson joins us on the set. white house senior adviser robert gibbs and cnbc's david faber and the star of the hit usa show "covert affairs" piper perabo. up next mike allen with a look at the top stories in the
somehow you always managed to clear the decks, just in time. >> oh. >> what in the blue pacific is going on in here? what are they doing with these dresses? >> you see, sir, they're preparing a show that special service house is putting on, yes, sir. >> special service offices. >> yes, sir. parker, he's our special service
officer and a whiz at this stuff, sir. a regular sigfield, isn't that right? >> i am. >> at 26 past the hour time to take a look at morning papers. from our parade of papers, "the los angeles times" says film legend earnest borgnine has died. the academy-award winner played hundreds of roles including the clip you saw from "mckale's navy" also "the dirty dozen". >> it was slurred in there. i was square scared. sorry. from here to eternity, he was 95 years old. >> do you remember that show? >> i do. >> he was good actor. >> "new york times" new data shows cell phone carriers are being floodeded with surveillance requests from law enforcement agencies. cell phone companies received 1.3 million requests last year for subscriber information, including text messages and caller locations. carriers say they generally require a court order or
subpoena unless the request considered an emergency. >> i spent a week with my brothers so i'm so ready for you all. i'm just saying. >> ready for brotherly love? >> yeah. >> that. >> special brotherly love. >> i can handle you. you can make fun of me all you want. i'll be just fine. >> i'm sure. >> joining us now, chief white house correspondent for politico, mike allen, here with the morning playbook. good morning. >> welcome back, mika. >> thank you. >> before we get to the news, a landmark birthday in addition to steve rattner mentioned his birthday tie, he celebrated on the 5th of july when we were at the lake, but you helped joan vandehei of oshkosh celebrate her 70th. >> we did. >> mother of julie, jim and johnny, but today is 80 for secretary rumsfeld. what an amazing man. >> wow. >> oldest and youngest defense secretary, 80. >> ian's old boss. >> mine too. >> my brother's. >> something to aspire to. >> it is. >> that's great. big week for republicans in the
house. calling key votes they're trying to push democrats' backs against the walls. tell us about it. what's politico reporting? >> you were talking earlier about wednesday having that health care reform vote and that's just one of a series week by week until the august recess. house republicans will take votes and try to put democrats on the spot. so after that, they're going to take up defense spending, try to avoid the cuts towards the end of the year. regulatory reform at the end of the month. tax reform and try to just cue up a series of votes that will help them push their message at the same time that will give them material to use in ads against democrats. fascinating side light to this, this has been coordinated with the romney campaign so the romney campaign helped them with this timetable. also romney advisers spokepeople, will be on the hill working with members how to
maximize the impact of these votes. >> what is the point of trying to repeal obamacare? what is the point. besides playing into the narrative -- >> honestly -- >> you guys just don't want anything done? >> president obama has said this election will be a debate about two visions. sorry your phone is ringing. >> it's not going to happen. >> debate about two visions. >> you know it's not going to happen. >> so these votes actually illustrate the differences on these issues. so why not have that debate right here and right now and have members of congress pick a side and hash it out. >> governor romney is talking about jobs and the fact that the president has created enough jobs. why focus on these issues. transparent politics. you say it's politics, it's fine. >> talked about getting our economy going again, includes things like repealing obamacare, one of the things they're voting on. he talks about his concerns about the sequestering of the defense budget, one of the issues they'll be voting on. these are real substantive issues. >> talks about the debt growing which steve talks about with the charts. how do you address debt issues if you don't address the rise in
health care spending. does governor romney have a replacement plan for any of these ideas? >> sure. look if you go to his website, he lays out what he would do in health care reform. before you can address those issues you have to deal with the repeel parts. >> all these votes are political symbolism. republicans trying -- >> they're substantive points, steve. aren't like distraction issues. these are real issues. >> like putting out a policy paper. we'll find out their policies. >> that's like a healthy process in an election cycle. >> be nice to dan. >> i like dan. i don't understand how you have a repeal vote with no alternative. >> there is an alternative. >> and no hope for it. >> mike allen sitting here waiting. >> you know, thank you very much. >> have a great week. >> talk to you soon. coming up steve rattner has new charts on the unemployment numbers including a comparison between president obama and president reagan's time in office. more "morning joe," in just a moment.
going across the country and celebrating what he calls forward. well forward doesn't look a lot like forward to the millions and millions of families struggling today in this great country. doesn't have to be this way. america can do better. and this kick in the gut has got to end. >> mitt romney on be friday reacting to the june jobs report. steve rattner has charts taking a closer look at all the numbers there. how would you characterize the numbers? bad, dismal? >> certainly worse than what we expected and better than we feared. we had two previous pretty bad months. i think people were hoping for over 100,000 jobs this last month in june and we got 80,000 jobs. it was a disappointment, but i think people are accustomed to the fact we're in a slow growth. >> is there any growth in specific sectors? >> when you break it down by sectors you see a varying pattern that explains why things
are sluggish. if you look at this chart, you'll see going back to the beginning of the recovery, sectors like professional and business services, education and health, have grown very significantly and, in fact, are now at or above their pre-recession levels. you hear a lot of talk these days about manufacturing, which is growing again, although not back to where it was before this recession started. but here's a point that we've discussed before that's very important. you've got very, very large sectors like government, like construction, which you can think of as home building, that are still down in the doldrums. look at construction which had no recovery even as there has been some recovery in the jobs, so that's a big part of the problem. you've got roughly 30% of the economy where the jobs are simply not growing or including finance, media, a lot of very important industries. >> construction, i would assume that a huge percentage of construction being off, is related to the housing situation. >> sure. >> that's home building, yes. >> so you keep hearing, repeatedly over and over again,
why hasn't the obama administration gotten all the collective components of the housing crisis in this country, the banks, whatever, down to the white house, two or three days, lock the doors, and solve this thing? come up with solutions? >> this is a whole -- we can do a segment on it. the housing crisis is the most politically fractious issue i have ever seen almost in my life. if you look at romney's plan, 59-point plan, never mentions housing. the obama administration say they've done housing things not a huge amount. do you help the people who have second mortgages who maybe shouldn't have. what do you do about the problem? it's truly a nest. let's take a look at what mika mentioned earlier, which is comparing obama and reagan. because as we all know, reagan got re-elected with 7.4% unemployment, highest since fdr, but the trajectories are interesting to look at. so, obama is the blue line and you can see that his recession or his increase -- peak
unemployment came earlier, 10%. reagan had higher unemployment in his peak, up to 10.8%, almost exactly in the middle of his term. but what then happened is reagan, unemployment under reagan dropped much more quickly than under president obama and so by this point in reagan's election -- first term, he was down to 7.2% unemployment, we are, of course, at 8.2% unemployment, reagan was at 7.4 at the time of the election. the point is that the trend here, i think, plays a big role in it. one thing people to remember, is everybody says, no one since fdr has been re-elected with this unemployment. fdr was re-elected had with 16.5% unemployment. a lot of people feel the trend is the important factor. >> what was the unemployment rate when fdr came in? about 25%. >> he moved it down a lot. >> a sense things were getting better. that's the question. >> the question -- >> let's look at one brief bit
of good news in this report. which was that hours worked by people increased which is a good thing. means employers are getting closer to needing more help. and for the first time in a good while, wages actually went una little bit. the real wages meaning after inflation have been dropping very sharply and that's part of why we are having trouble getting out of the recession, people don't have money to spend and this up tick last month is actually quite good news if it turns out to be sustained during the next few months. >> could i ask you to come back and do an entire segment on housing? i don't understand why it's not discussed? >> i'm happy to come back and discuss housing. >> we should. because it doesn't -- am i wrong or has it -- except for the consumer financial protection bureau created by elizabeth warren it doesn't seem like which -- >> which has done nothing yet but okay. >> they addressed some of the homeowners under water and some are receiving checks -- >> we digress. >> your hatred is ridiculous and
completely -- >> so many reasons for it that has nothing to do with what's right. >> what's the biggest policy change that the federal government can do to address the housing issue? one or two things? >> articulate while the music is playing in ten seconds. >> a structure where people can restructure their debts and stay in their houses and get out from under the foreclosure cloud. that's the biggest thing. >> and what's stunning to me is that we haven't. i mean, how do we not -- >> because it's so politically fractious. a lot of the tea party stuff started over housing. the tea party started over housing. rick santelli on the floor of the stock exchange yelling and screaming about people being bailed out who have taken out irresponsible mortgages. >> we should all move to sweden. it's perfect there. do you know men and women get a year off when they have a baby? men too. that's crazy. >> that's a good deal. >> all these people with babies walking around. jealous. coming up walter isaacson and
i'm barack obama, and i approved this message.ovider ist but centurylink is committed to being a different kind of communications company by continuing to help you do more and focus on the things that matter to you. somebody didn't book with travelocity, with 24/7 customer support to help move them to the pool daddy promised! look at me, i'm swimming! somebody, get her a pony! [ female announcer ] the travelocity guarantee. from the price to the room to the trip you'll never roam alone. you know that comes with a private island? really? no. it comes with a hat. see, airline credit cards promise flights for 25,000 miles, but... [ man ] there's never any seats for 25,000 miles. frustrating, isn't it? but that won't happen with the capital one venture card. you can book any airline, anytime. hey, i just said that. after all, isn't traveling hard enough? ow! [ male announcer ] to get the flights you want, sign up for a venture card at capitalone.com.
what's in your wallet? uh, it's ok. i've played a pilot before. thought they were dead. huh? [ male announcer ] should've used roundup. it kills weeds to the root, so they don't come back. roundup. no root. no weed. no problem. it's 45 pasts the hour. welcome back to "morning joe." look at the beautiful shot over new york city. joining us the host of "studio 360" kurt andersen author of the novel "true believers." good to have you back on the show. >> good to be here. >> we'll talk politics in a minute but let's talk about the book. tell us about it. >> it is the fictional memoir, novel of a woman who i've described to people as hillary clinton, if hillary hadn't
married this guy called bill and had just become a lawyer on her own. a celebrated lawyer who is now -- who has just removed herself from the supreme court, on the short list, and she is among other things in this book, revealing why. the secrets of her youth in 1968 that would have made her supreme court candidacy very problematic affair. >> it looks at the way we live now and -- >> it does. >> the way we lived in the '60s? >> yeah. flips back and forth between her life as a girl and woman, young woman in the 1960s, and her life as a big mocker of the harold ford, steve rattner type. >> oh! interesting. >> flips back and forth. >> now i get it. >> flips back and forth between those worlds and tries -- and basically tries to explain how the '60s are still with us in many ways. >> that gets to your time here, "new york times" piece about
the '60s about the baby boomers, and i was reading several letters to the editor, i think they were in over the weekend or whatever. >> i read those. >> for viewers who may not have read the piece run through the piece and the reaction. >> the piece, it ran on the fourth of july, and it was basically arguing this recent insight i had and i'm sure others have had it in the past, which is that we think of the right demonizes the '60s as that's when everything went off the tracks, the culture became coarse, do your own thing, whereas the left tends to think, the '60s when all good things began. i realize that there was a certain kind of selfishness among other things that got unleashed in the 1960s, whether it's, i want to wear jeans all the time and grow my hair long and get high or, as it turned out eventually, i want to be unregulated and untaxed --
>> heidenism. >> and selfishness of a kind that the left tends to like, but also as a kind the right tends to like, and we all became libertarians on a certain level starting in the late 1960s. >> rattner, is that what happened to you? >> does it look like it? >> not really. >> you should see him at home. >> oh. >> i think to your point what's happened is, what happened in the '60s was there was just a lot more freedom to kind of be yourself, do your own thing, and a lot more tolerance. >> yes. >> and you go back to sort of the "mad men" era, tolerance of women, the deviation from the dark shirt and tie, and i think on balance it was good thing. >> you saw, however, as i made the point in the times piece when i was growing up in omaha in the '60s, the rich people, didn't buy a big house, they didn't -- they would never have thought of saying oh, let's get these config kaer to marginal rates down from 90% to 35%.
they didn't pay themselves 500 times what their employees were paid. >> what do you think out of the 1960s, perhaps occurred after the delayed reaction i think that a lot of people had, to wow, they lied to us, the government lied to us about the war in vietnam? >> you know, you look at the trust in the federal government and the trust in institution, it was really starting with lyndon johnson at the end of his term and lin don johnson figures prominently in true believers, that's where the slide began and has never really recovered. it was not watergate after watergate -- >> watergate was a pretty -- >> look at the numbers starting in 1968. >> what was the reaction to your piece? because this conversation started because mike was contemplating some of the letters to the editor? >> a lot of people on the left said, took me as criticizing everything that happened in the '60s, that the civil rights and women's right movement and
environmental movement were all bad. i wasn't saying that at all. and a lot of -- lots of libertarians said we're not selfish, we're moral. >> it's kind of like the political conversation today? >> something like that. >> the novel is "true believers." you can read an excerpt on our blog mojo.msnbc.com. kurt, stay with us. the look is great. thank you so much. >> thank you. >> coming up andy murray's graceful exit from wimbledon. >> all right. i'm going to try this. it's not going to be easy. [ morgan ] right now when you use your visa card, you're entered for a chance to win a trip to the olympic games for life. to cheer the summer athletes to new heights,
visa. supporting athletes and the olympic games for 25 years. ♪ hello...rings ♪ what the... what the... what the... ♪ are you seein' this? ♪ ♪ uh-huh... uh-huh... uh-huh... ♪ ♪ it kinda makes me miss the days when we ♪ ♪ used to rock the microphone ♪ back when our credit score couldn't get us a micro-loan ♪ ♪ so light it up! ♪ even better than we did before ♪ ♪ yeah prep yourself america we're back for more ♪ ♪ our look is slacker chic and our sound is hardcore ♪ ♪ and we're here to drop a rhyme about free-credit-score ♪ ♪ i'm singing free-credit-score-dot-com ♪
. time for sports. >> better you than me. >> thank you. andy murray, well, andy had the chance to end great britain's long wait and become the first british-born player to win the men's title at wimbledon in 76 years but andy failed. roger federer beat him, fourth set, federer serving for the match and title, able to return the serve, get it up there. >> there we go. >> boom. >> mauurray's forehand goes wid.
federer claims the championship. he's tied with pete sampras and william rencha for the most number of championships all time. it made federer the number one player in the worldp he's won 17 majors in his career. as blisful for federer equally as gut wrenching with murray who struggled with his emotions after he lost. >> i'm going to try this, and it's not going to be easy. . >> everybody always talks about the pressure of playing at wimbledon, how tough it is, but but it's not the people watching, they make it so much easier to play, the support has been incredible so thank you. >> oh. >> little less crying, more practice. >> i think maybe he ought to stop with the sob -- >> so tough on people. >> speaking of the red sox --
>> how are they doing? >> they were not playing. the pawtucket came up to play the yankees, minor league team, yankees beat them. no highlights of that, please. >> okay. >> the american league east standings -- >> what does that say? >> yankees in first place by seven points. >> orioles, rays, watch out for the rays. one of the best teams, took on one of the worst clubs in the american league, rangers facing the twins. watch this. fourth inning. >> he's talking -- >> wow. that knocked -- the players are coming off the field whether they want them to or not. >> yep. >> holy cow. >> yikes. after the game twins outfielder denard span tweeted, quote, that's the loudest noise i've heard. i thought jesus was coming. end quote. >> scary. >> the rangers went on to win 4-3.
the pirates at home taking on the giants. andrew mccutchen, best player in the national league so far, hits one deep to right center. boom. one of the best parks in the major leagues, by the way. second home run of the game. the first player in pirates history with a batting average of .362 and 60 rbis. the pirates won 13-2. they lead the national league east at the all-star break for the first time since 1997. go pirates. >> there you go. >> go pittsburgh. >> you did good, mike. >> willie -- >> good lord. >> standing by in the green room, best-selling biographer walter isaacson. >> he's sold enough books. why have him on? >> greed greed greed. >> i hope he brought us a book. >> he wants more. >> more "morning joe" in just a moment. ♪ [ jennifer ] better. stronger. believe. happier. healthier. i believe weight watchers made me more powerful.
it's time to believe again. stand up and take charge. i believe if you want to change your life, you can. ♪ believe in yourself [ female announcer ] weight watchers -- rated number one best plan for weight loss by u.s. news and world report, again. [ jennifer ] join for $1. weight watchers. believe. because it works. i knew it'd be tough on our retirement savings, especially in this economy. but with three kids, being home more really helped. man: so we went to fidelity. we talked about where we were and what we could do. we changed our plan and did something about our economy. now we know where to go for help if things change again. call or come in today to take control of your personal economy.
top of the hour. welcome back to "morning joe." mike barnicle, dan senor and kurt andersen joining us, joining the table, just back, the president and ceo of the aspen institute, walter isaacson. here in person, up early. i hear you don't like to do that? >> well, morning is not my favorite part. >> thank you for waking up for us. headlines out of the aspen ideas festival? if you had to put it in a nutshell. >> one of the ideas that gained more traction than i expected was national service, something that general stan mcchrystal, mike mullen talked about, and
valerie jarrett picked it up, seeing it move through the festival. the fact that people should be expected to do national service. you come out of the '60s with this notion of the draft and national service is something we flinch from. hey, from my father's generation, it was expected of everybody and it helped increase social mobility. >> i think this country needs a mission and someone needs to galvanize it. >> i also think that people need to be part of a common cause as opposed to thinking that you just begin your career just out for yourselves. >> i like it. >> what is the -- >> i love it. >> the most gala tare yan institution in this country? the military. where you meet people not where you're from. i meet you from new orleans. >> right. >> i meet you from omaha. do you think in terms of presidential legacies that one of the most enduring legacies any president could have would be to institute some form of
national service? >> it's a missed opportunity. >> i heard the ideas a festival when mcchrystal talked about this, people were applauding, standing ovation, had a huge impact, huge reaction. how many of those -- >> just not my kids. >> how many think their sons and daughters are going to serve in the military when they do that. not just purely a military context. >> i think you can define it in terms of real service. can't let it be so mushy people can just go hitch hiking around the country and call it service. i'm on the board of teaching america. i think people dedicate themselves to two years teaching in urban school districts, really important way to do national service. as mike said, it's a form of social mobility and mixing, whether you're in the navy or in teacher america or a public health corps or whatever we create, if you're there for a real commitment for two years with people of diverse
backgrounds it's probably good for you and it's good for the country. >> we've had 30 years, really, in so many realms of american culture and the economy where it's all about ask what my country can do for me. not what i can do for my country. >> we have a major foreign -- an attack on our country of the worst kind and everyone's told to go shopping. are you kidding me? we have an economic collapse and what are we asked to give back? i think that a president should take the opportunity, our president, whoever wins this next election, should take the opportunity to ask everyone to get involved in rebuild this nation's pride. >> mike said, what a legacy would that be for a president to say -- >> incredible. >> i created a -- you don't have to make it absolutely mandatory. you can just make it expected. people say, where are you serving? >> let me ask another question. and we hear repeated talk about, you know, the 99% and the 1% and it's related to the economy. are you at all concerned that we
might have a cultural 1% in the making because of this separation that wealth and affluence and good education automatically brings, we might be looking at a generation that has no concept of what the grocery store clerk or gas station -- what their lives are like because of this? >> we moved very inch that direction already. it's not probably 1%. it's 10% or some larger number. but, as donald murray and others have talked about, there is this considerable class divide in a cultural sense. >> walter? >> you know, michael sandal was also at the ideas festival, which is, he has a book called "what money can't buy" and it's great and it's about the 1 or 10% -- >> we've had him on. >> nowadays you can have your own private lane, read something in "the new york times" about somebody at a romney fund-raiser said i'm a v.i.p., where's the v.i.p. line. at the airports or fenway
park -- >> sandal is a big red sox fan -- >> i know. that's why i picked him. >> that notion you can have a separate lane in life that's not something that previous generations felt. you look at ben franklin and the type of country he and jefferson endured, you want to raise everybody up but you want to say certain things we have in common and that's the question we have to ask, what's our common ground in this country and that's what curt's novel does well. >> why should national service be a way to bring us together and then on top of it look at the unemployment rate among graduating seniors in college, it's -- >> you know, you should mention as part of that, that every kid who graduates from college gets a job. that could be part and parcel of the national service project. >> it doesn't make sense to me. >> when students are going into college or going to community college or that next stage of life after high school, figuring out what they want to do, they actually get so much more out of it. we've seen this in israel, research in israel, on the role the military plays there, the
kids go into the military age 18, 19, 20. they don't go into college until they're 2021, 22. completely different maturity level, have a different perspective on life, real responsibility and get so much more out of the experience and much more focused on figuring out what they want to do in terms of their careers. >> i wasn't ready for college until i was 30 or 40 myself. >> one of the people in aspen who picked up on this was the defense minister of israel saying this is why we have a society that's more tightly bound and, of course, israel's now going through that with the question making everybody into national service there as opposed to exempting people for religious reasons. >> right. >> we've got a lot of other news to cover. today the president is going to be pushing for a one-year extension of the bush-era tax cuts for people making under $250,000 a year. the move comes on the heels of friday's disappointing jobs report. and as house republicans push to permanently extend the bush tax cuts for the middle and upper class. why don't we try to hit at this
with walter and kurt at the table. dan, you obviously think the president is making a mistake here. i would beg to differ. >> well, pushing for -- i mean i'm for pushing for the extension of the bush tax cuts. we talked about this like it's a new policy, these tax cuts. >> overall. >> the tax cuts have been in place for a long time. to not allow for the extension -- >> what's a long time? >> since the early 2000s. >> to not allow them for them to be extends is tax increase which what is the concern is about the fiscal cliff at the end of the year. so many democratic senators as i said earlier expressing concern and siding with the republicans on this. >> why do so many people who are beneficiaries of the bush tax cuts pay at a rate of 15, 16%, and i'm paying at 35%? >> well, there's a number of factors not the least of which -- >> my income. >> yeah. but the charitable deductions. a lot of people, if they weren't giving a lot to charity they would be paying higher than 15%, 19, 20, 21%. a number of factors that go into
that reduced number. look, i'm for broadening the tax base and i'm for making it a little more fair, but the idea that we can do this in the context of not having a larger tax be reform that doesn't consider the fact that our tax code is incredibly uncompetitive and we are attracting -- we want to attract capital from around the world and off the sidelines from american companies and investors in the middle of an economic -- 41 month economic downturn is unrealistic. >> are you going to congratulate me for not bursting out laughing when you said it's because they're so charitable. >> you're laughing now. >> i'm serious about that. i mean this is true. you keep that rate low, in part, a lot of wealthy americans keep that rate low by giving away a lot of money. that's a fact. if they didn't give away a lot of money their tax rate would be higher. you could say -- you're laughing at what motivates them clearly is that grin slapped across your face, question their motivation, but the result is people giving away a lot of money and
consequently paying less in taxes. do you think it's bad our tax code favors and incent sizes charitable giving? >> no. >> we should try to even out the tax code, close loopholes but why not do this for a year -- >> let's not set the perfect, the grand bargains and all these realms against the reasonable and good which is to say people who make over a quarter million dollars a year should pay what they were paying in taxes a dozen years ago. doesn't seem -- it ought not to be controversial to me. >> i think mitch daniel, others at aspen said it's clear, what we should be doing, reducing the number of loopholes, making a broader tax base. i think there's a compromise to be done on the 250,000. you're right, if the president would say, you know, we're in tough times, people have prospered real well, they should be expected to do their part, i'm asking them to step up, i think a lot of people would step up and say yeah, i can see this. you know, they'll reach a compromise somewhere, probably above 250,000. but you shouldn't extend the
cuts for everybody. >> a line in the sand or what would the compromise be? what would the republicans put up with? would they give anything? >> sure. i think if there was a sense there was a real grand bargain to be done, a real big deal to be done, i think you would see a lot of compromise on both sides. i want to say, though, a lot of what you're talking about, mike, was basically you're articulating the rationale for the buffet rule and one thing striking about the buffet rule how little money it would raise for our government. it was inconsequential amount of money. this isn't actually about reducing the deficit. it is about symbolism. symbolism is important -- >> it's also about fairness. >> the election is not about job creation. it's about political symbolism. >> walter -- >> it's about fairness. certain moral principles we have as a country maybe it doesn't raise a lot of revenue but want everybody to feel we're part of this endeavor together. >> you also want to draw capital into the economy to help companies get going and jobs created.
if the tension is between the sense of fairness and potential to grow the economy drawing in capital, which would you choose? >> i don't think the fairness of having a rule like a buffet rule is really going to destroy capital formation in this country. it hasn't for the past 80 years leading up to the present period. >> i have a question off what you were talking about. and it's probably unanswerable. but why has this president and the past president, george w. bush, been seemingly so afraid to use the word, we have to sacrifice, the word sacrifice. you know, have they never gone back and listened to franklin roosevelt in the '30s? why are they so afraid of us? >> because the last president to do that in an explicit way was jimmy carter who is now regarded as the very epitome of he's a bummer. he asked us to sacrifice, used the word malaise, we don't do that as president anymore. >> goes back to the notion of national service.
if you wrap it up to what we can do for our country people would step up and say i'm in. count me in. >> yeah. >> well, why won't the republicans count themselves in on this, just even temporarily, until there's some sort of deal? >> i think most importantly they feel that the economy -- we need some certainty. >> is this going to hurt the economy? >> well, they're for permanent extension of the bush tax cuts which have been in place for a while. president clinton has talked about extension of the bush tax cuts. senate -- number of senate democrats are talking about it. so the republican position on this, is not outside of any kind of mainstream perspective on it. if you told me they were the only ones articulating this point of view, i would be a little more sympathetic. >> isn't there a problem also, the sort of endless bait and switch of the bush tax cuts now a decade old, where it was negotiated to end at a certain point. then we pushed that a little bit. okay. now it's pushed to here. let's -- why can't we have the courage of our convictions as a country, as a legislative party?
>> if you had a real debate about a real structural tax reform that was broad and not just about one individual item, that had some long-term certainty to it, i think people would be flexible all around. that is not the kind of debate we're having right now. >> and doesn't -- we don't look to be having through november and, you know, until the end of the year. >> the odd thing is, we all kind of know what the solutions are. on the fiscal problem we know it's within 5% of where simpson-bowles got. on this sort of thing, we know it's broadening the tax base. making it simpler and more fairer. it's a question of leadership to say we can get there. it's not that hard. >> one of the issues -- we can disagree around this table on the merit of some of these things, but if you look at 2009/2010, just leadership, washington is broken, technically washington wasn't broken in 2009/2010. president obama had a democratic majority in the house and a democratic senate. he pushed big ideas. i may disagree with those ideas
but he pushed health care, pushed the stimulus, dodd/frank. this is not one he pushed. for people to blame this on logjam in washington and a broken washington and intransigent republicans is absurd. president obama had washington. it was his. he could lead and he chose not to on this issue. why? >> let's see how many liberals dan senor can take in one day. we'll bring in someone else to take you on you're doing very well. joining us from washington senior obama campaign adviser and former white house press secretary -- >> bring some balance to the table, some diversity to the table. >> gibbs thing he's here to talk about the national championship football game. >> exactly. >> i heard the last five seconds and i'm happy to join this conversation. >> where do we begin? let's first talk about the president's announcement today, the one-year extension of the bush-era tax cuts for people who make under $250,000 a year. i get it. i think it's important. i wish the president had done this a long time ago. but in terms of the campaign, which is what you're heavily
involved in, what impact will this have in a big way on jobs and the economy? >> well, look, i think we need to give middle-class families the certainty they need and deserve that the tax rates that they are paying this year, aren't going to change next year. i think it's going to have a decent impact on the economy. i think you guys were talking about tax fairness, talking about how we get our debts and deficits under control. there's $850 billion over ten years is locked away in the bush-era tax cuts for the wealthiest. there are tax cuts that have never quite honestly worked in creating jobs. they've run up our debts and deficits and millionaires and billionaires aren't a tax cut away from lots of jobs in this economy. let's focus on the middle class, let's pay down some of our debts and our deficits, and ask those that have done well, regardless of how this economy has been,
let's ask them to pay a little bit more. pay their fair share. >> all right. robert, cliff notes, we took notes. >> makes a lot of sense. >> let me ask you a question. >> yes, sir. >> we read the polls here each and every day, me i have to tape my eyelids open when we do the polts because they're all about right now. it's a snapshot of right now. let me ask you this question. >> sure. >> this election i think will be about where are we going and who's going to take us there. so on election day morning when goy to vote, millions of americans go to vote, we've had a guy driving the bus for the past four years, why should i continue to allow barack obama to drive the bus when i have another option? >> because when barack obama got the keys to the bus, it was trapped in the ditch with three flat tires. we've changed the tires, we've pulled the bus out of the ditch, and we're starting up the road to strengthening the middle class. there's a different theory, mitt romney wants to take that bus, probably a bus made in
switzerland or bermuda, and -- >> all right. here we go. >> we wants to turn that bus around, he wants to pick up some millionaires and billionaires and shower them with cash, we'll stop by wall street and we'll take regulations off of wall street, we'll let them write the rules, and we'll see how that works out for the middle class. that's exactly what this campaign is about, minus the weird bus analogy that i had to jump through the hoops with. but yeah. >> what's the point of the content about bermuda? >> what? >> you made a shot there about bermuda? >> it's lovely this time of year i understand. >> yeah. >> no. i mean look, i think one of the most interesting developments and probably the one of the most important developments in this campaign, that barnicle missed because he was paying attention to the polls last week, was, you know, it's reported that mitt romney has taken pretty extraordinary steps to hide the fact that he has a shell corporation in bermuda. we know as a result of good investigative reporting he's had
a bank account in switzerland and he's got investments in the caymans. it's relevant to this campaign because of the very tax fairness issue you all have talked about. the next four years we're going to have to undergo comprehensive tax reform and, you know, is somebody who has sheltered their income taxes in switzerland and the caymans and bermuda, really somebody who's going to get under the hood and get us to a place of tax fairness? look, let's be clear, but hold on, i think it's one more important point, let's be clear, we need to know why he's got that money there. the american people deserve to know if he's sheltering this money somewhere, or quite frankly is he not paying the taxes that he owes and the only way to do that, quite honestly, is to release more tax returns and show the american people. >> i'm all for that. i would like to see the tax returns as well. having said that, this is something the campaign has brought up, the obama campaign, you are going there with this. i'm going to read the response from the romney campaign. >> yeah.
>> from this strategy and then let dan senor take you on. the romney statement is this -- on the offshore bank accounts. the obama campaign's latest unfounded character assault on mitt romney is unseemly and disgusting. mitt romney had a successful career in the private sector. pays every dime of taxes he owes. has given generously to charitable organizations and served numerous causes greater than himself. barack obama has become what he once ran against a typical politician willing to use false and dishonest attacks to save his job after failing to do his job. the american people expected more from this president and he continues to let them down. dan, to robert? >> stunningly dishonest. i mean the reason -- there's nothing secretive about these accounts. >> i would like to see the tax returns then. >> the reason we know about these accounts, as robert knows, the reason we know about these accounts is because they are in the tax returns that mitt romney released and the federal disclosure form that mitt romney financial disclosure form, that
mitt romney submitted. that's why we know about them. wasn't like the obama campaign opposition researchers went down to bermuda or because reporters dug this up. we know this because he submitted things information. >> but dan -- >> hold on, robert. you got your two-min ad. i want to finish this. yesterday on cnn you popped another one. you said that there are questions -- candy crowley said, some of the accusations you're making about some of mitt romney's companies, the companies that bain invested in, took place after mitt romney actually left bain capital and you said that's not so clear. >> i'm not sure. >> it's not. >> he left bain capital in february 2009, also on a financial disclosure that he signed and if he actually is doing what you were saying he's doing, be which is being misleading, and is actually punishable under federal criminal law. are you suggesting that mitt romney is guilty of some kind of felony here? >> dan, what i'm suggesting is, nobody has any idea because the only person with the tax returns is mitt romney. now, let me go through -- >> you're responding to
information he released. he released those tax returns. that's what you're responding to. >> i've watched the dan senor infomercial and i would like to be factcheck.org and bring truth into this discussion. let's understand that the day before mitt romney became governor of massachusetts he transferred the ownership of this shell corporation in bermuda to his wife in order to not have to disclose it the day before he became governor of massachusetts. a notion that somehow mitt romney has been transparent about the fact that he's offshored money all over this world is patently ridiculous. okay. but look, dan, i don't know if he's paid money, i don't know if he's getting a tax break, i don't know if he's shetering money. he gave 23 years of tax return to john mccain's vetting committee when he wanted to be vice president of the united states. the vetting committee picked sarah palin and not mitt romney. did they do that because of something they saw in 23 years of tax returns? why give john mccain 23 years of tax returns and the american people two years of tax returns.
simply meet the vetting standards his own father brought 40 years ago to this race and hand out some tax returns. >> you cited factcheck.org. they are -- looking at an ad your campaign is running right now which is the factcheck.org and "washington post" both have said is untrue, unfair, misleading. there's no evidence to back it up whatsoever. so you do acknowledge you guys are sort of pushing the envelope here a little bit on these charges? >> i acknowledge that "washington post," going through s.e.c. filings found that bain capital and mitt romney are pioneers, their words, in outsourcing jobs. he's -- >> outsourcing jobs where? >> china. >> four of six companies -- two of those six companies were back after mitt romney left office, four of the six -- >> again -- >> three of the six were companies in the united states outsourcing to american workers. >> no. outsourcing to places like china and overseas. we know just based on the last
five-minute discussion that -- >> why is factcheck.org and "washington post" saying that your ad is untrue, unfair, and misleading? >> because they've decided that somehow mitt romney left bain capital when filings showed that as late as 2001 he's the ceo and the le owner of bain capital. so that's exactly -- >> not the ceo. he was a passive investor. >> why not release the tax returns? >> why not release the tax returns, dan? can i tell you, this, dan, you've changed the subject like six times like the mitt romney campaign does. just like the -- >> give me a break. >> can we call -- >> give me a break, give me the tax returns. >> comes out on friday shows we're in bad shape. talk about wanting to change the subject. the wave of attacks against mitt romney are a distraction. we're in a jobs crisis and not talking about jobs. >> mika, call on me. >> i got you. >> robert? >> dan, release the tax returns. put all this to rest. if mitt romney is not hiding something in bermuda and
switzerland and the caymans, it will be in the tax returns. >> right. >> why not simply do it? >> i've said this -- >> the tax returns, he's -- >> i got a bank account at a bank near my house because there's an atm that's convenient to me. okay. why would -- just -- is mitt romney, is there a convenience swiss atm machine near his house in boston? i mean, that's ridiculous. >> the tax returns you are criticizing. the accounts come out of tax returns that he released. no one -- sounds like you -- including you are not suggesting based on what he's released in those accounts he has not paid his taxes fully, taxes he has owed. it's been disclosed in his financial forms. >> do you have a secret cayman account? do you have a company in bermuda? do you have a swiss bank account? >> the tax return -- >> i want one. >> the tax returns are on the bus. >> this has been so much fun. >> yeah. >> robert gibbs, thanks. come back. >> one more thing, mika. >> a distraction. >> this is a distraction.
>> no! >> can we get back to talking about the economy. >> robert? >> convenie eventually dan will answer the question, it will probably be in reruns, this is important because the next president will tackle tax reform and we have to taxol tax sheltering, offshoring of money, that's going to be a big part of this debate and the american people deserve to know where mitt romney has his money and why. >> mika is saying, dan is leaving. >> with the last word he is our guest. thank you very much. come back soon. >> all right. >> gibbs is great. >> i'll replace senor. >> i like him in the d.c. bureau. >> you two are trouble. thank god he was on location there. >> kurt andersen, thank you as well. >> thank you. >> kurt's novel "true believers," buy it, read it. it's a good one. walter isaacson stay with us. up next cnbc's david faber joins us with a look on his documentary on cyber espionage. you're watching "morning joe" brewed by starbucks.
29 past the hour. welcome back to "morning joe." rattner is back at the table with walter isaacson and mike barnicle and wit us now, co-anchor of cnbc's "squawk on the street" david faber, his new cnbc documentary looks at one of the biggest threats to american economic security, cyber espionage. look forward to that good to have you on board. >> nice to be here. >> let's start with the jobs numbers and unemployment situation. >> sure. >> friday's outlook, steve rattner characterized it as sort of bla and maybe not even getting better. >> yeah. blah is probably as good a term as any to use. 80,000 jobs, 8.2% where we are on the unemployment rate. the second quarter of this year, similar to last year in that again the first quarter of this year, like 2011, we looked as
though we were moving somewhere. especially if the first quarter of this year we had significant job growth and then hit a wall and the second quarter has come in as fairly lousy in terms of job growth. maybe maintaining enough of people who are coming into the work force. not really creating enough new jobs at all to soak up the unemployed. the question as we head into this summer or already in this summer with the election looming, with the fiscal cliff looming, with so much i hate to use the word but we hear it all the time uncertainty, will businesses really choose to hire more or are we going to be sort of stuck in this rut, blah so to speak? >> will they? >> we don't know is the obvious answer. i think as david said, we have this slow down for a couple years in a row and it's possible there's some statistical aberrations and people will start to hire. as i mentioned earlier in the show you see things like the number of hours a week people are working rising a bit, an indicator people may need more workers, but fundamentally four more unemployment reports between now and the election.
fundamentally president obama will face an election with unemployment on one side or the other of 8%. it's not going to feel like a double dip recession or going off a cliff but it's going to feel blah. the question is do you want to restore this guy. >> walter, historically who's been re-elected in a situation like this? >> well, very rarely, i mean, obviously franklin roosevelt and as you said earlier, you have to look at the trend line. one thing before steve jobs died, when i was talking to him about it, he said, you got to keep the manufacturing jobs, get them back. he was one who offshored, sent things to china, but he said, when you do that, you send your engineers to china and eventually your designers have to go to china. if i could get engineers here in the united states, you know, it would be much better off with this economy to start doing manufacturing. when steve showed the manufacturing numbers, slowly starting to rise, to me, that's the pulse of the american economy. >> yeah.
that's an important component. that is a bright spot that obama can point to and it is also connected to energy prices. natural gas prices in this country are very low. you have a lot of energy or a lot of generating plants using natural gas. cheap energy is the key. input for all manufacturers. we have started to see some jobs come back. not an enormous amount. >> i would love -- i wish steve jobs were here to explain how to get those jobs back. >> by the way, he did -- >> he sent an enormous number of jobs away. the fact is that it is very hard for us to be competitive in manufacturing long term and i'm all for trying to do some things -- >> why do you believe that's the case? >> why do i believe that's the case? >> wages we can't compete on but if you can compete on energy, which can be the largest input, larger than wages for many corporations in terms of manufacturing -- why wouldn't we be able to compete? >> because wages are another large component and we can't compete on wages. i'm not saying -- wait a minute. i'm not saying we're going out of manufacturing. i'm saying that manufacturing has been declining as a share of
our employment like agriculture did partly because of productivity, partly because of other factors, and we shouldn't kid ourselves that we're going to somehow change that pattern of manufacturing over the long term. i just don't believe it. and so i think the jobs are going to come from engineering and i understand that, you know, his point about it being near manufacturing, it's going to come from i.t., come from other sectors, no, not from manufacturing long term. >> the question i had is, you say it's about wages, but isn't it about productivity? if we could make american workers more productive, the wages would be fine. >> here's the problem, walter. if you go, as i have gone, to the general motors plant in shanghai, china, you will see a plant that looks like a plant in lancing, michigan proeshgs deucing kargs as efficiently as lancing, michigan, and pays its workers, a fifth, an eighth of what they get paid in michigan. >> doesn't have the legacy costs. wages are coming up, even though
its economy are slowing down substantially. it's not just europe any more. a lot of concern about the second largest economy, china. >> let's make the transition to cyber espionage, the chinese threat, your documentary airing on cnbc. let's take a look at a clip. >> what is the worst case scenario here? >> we continue to bleed our intellectual property to the point where we just cannot compete with other countries, china specifically. now they can compete directly in say cars and consumer products and durable goods and nondurable goods. most of which is stolen from the united states. that research and development. we lose that, we lose that edge to future prosperity for the united states. it's that serious. >> so steve was talking about general motors plant in shanghai. so what sense does it make for us to take in all sorts of chinese students who go to stanford, m.i.t., and talking about intellectual theft of property and return to run plants in china or return with
what they learned here to china. >> right. it would be nice to keep them here and have them start businesses here. i know that's something that's been considered. but there is a fiscal aspect to chinese espionage. it's significant. not an issue discussed widely or broadly in court america but a huge issue and one that i wanted to report more on because i had enough conversations with ceos or board members off the record who said you know what, the fbi has just come to us and said the chinese are behind our firewall and they've been taking stuff from us and we just learned it, not sure what we should do. unfortunately, mike, so few companies are willing to come forward and say they've been breached and yet, countless breaches have occurred. largely over the internet, although the physical aspects unfortunately are significant too where the chinese will pay people off to steal secrets and bring them home. >> i can recall several years ago, jim, former deputy director, assistant director of the fbi, telling me that he thought that this was one of the biggest threats we faced.
chinese espionage. cyber espionage. why has it taken us so long -- maybe it hasn't taken us so long. >> hear about it here or a story, there the google story we remember from a couple years back where they were breached. very few companies want to come public and that's been the main problem. >> why? >> they worry about their reputation. if they do business in china they're going to be -- have trouble there, more trouble than perhaps it's worth. and they worry about their stock price and many other things. so, there is not a concerted effort to attack this and we don't know how much money has been lost in r and d. many of these companies have no idea what's been taken. it's not like the thief that comes to your home. you know what's been stolen. they have no idea and the chinese are employing tens of thousands we believe and the experts we spoke to who agree who come in every day doing nothing but trying to steal secrets from u.s. corporations and sift through whatever they find to figure out what's valble. >> they do it very well.
one of the great merciless nations in the history. >> thank you. cyber espionage, the chinese threat, premiers tonight on cnbc at 9:00 eastern and pacific times. a must watch. david, thanks very much. >> thank you for having me. >> good to have you on. >> look forward to seeing it. >> the money race, how anonymous donations are reshaping the political process. we're going to talk to the editor of nationalmemo.com. also nicolas confessore of the "new york times." "morning joe" back in a moment. according to ford, the works fuel saver package could literally pay for itself. jim twitchel is this true? yes it's true. how is this possible? proper tire inflation, by using proper grades of oil, your car runs more efficiently, saves gas. you could be doing this right now? yes i could, mike. i'm slowing you down? yes you are. my bad. the works fuel saver package. just $29.95 or less after rebate. only at your ford dealer.
so, to sum up, you take care of that, you take care of these, you save a bunch of this. that works. ♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] everyone likes a bit of order in their life. virtual wallet helps you get it. keep track of spending, move money with a slide, and use the calendar. all to see your money how you want. ♪ use the points we earn with our citi thankyou card for a relaxing vacation. ♪
sometimes, we go for a ride in the park. maybe do a little sightseeing. or, get some fresh air. but this summer, we used our thank youpoints to just hang out with a few friends in london. [ male announcer ] the citi thankyou visa card. redeem the points you've earned to travel with no restrictions. rewarding you, every step of the way. redeem the points you've earned to travel with no restrictions. ♪ hello...rings ♪ what the... what the... what the... ♪ are you seein' this? ♪ ♪ uh-huh... uh-huh... uh-huh... ♪ ♪ it kinda makes me miss the days when we ♪ ♪ used to rock the microphone ♪ back when our credit score couldn't get us a micro-loan ♪ ♪ so light it up! ♪ even better than we did before ♪ ♪ yeah prep yourself america we're back for more ♪ ♪ our look is slacker chic and our sound is hardcore ♪ ♪ and we're here to drop a rhyme about free-credit-score ♪ ♪ i'm singing free-credit-score-dot-com ♪ ♪ dot-com narrator: offer applies with enrollment in freecreditscore.com. an accident doesn't have to slow you down.
walter isaacson, thank you so much for joining us this morning. if you haven't already read it, be sure to read walter's biography on steve jobs "steve jobs". >> how many books do you want to sell? >> really. >> is anybody watching who read it? that's my question. >> yeah. you're going to go for the world, to have the world buy the book. up next, a time to kill, from drone wars to night raids, "esquire's" tom juno examines what he calls the lethal presidency of barack obama. keep it here on "morning joe." the medicare debate continues in washington...
...more talk on social security... ...but washington isn't talking to the american people. [ female announcer ] when it comes to the future of medicare and social security, you've earned the right to know. ♪ ...so what does it mean for you and your family? [ female announcer ] you've earned the facts. ♪ washington may not like straight talk, but i do. [ female announcer ] and you've earned a say.
rated number one best plan for weight loss by u.s. news and world report, again. [ jennifer ] join for $1. weight watchers. believe. because it works. welcome back to "morning joe." 46 past the hour. here with us "esquire" magazine's, tom junod, his article explores the historic fall laedy of president obama's anti-terror policies and writes in part, quote, you are a historic figure, mr. president. you are the first who has made use of your power to target and kill individuals identified as a threat to the united states throughout your entire term. more than any other president, you have made the killing rather than the capture of individuals the option of first resort and have killed them both from the sky, with drones, and on the ground with nighttime raids, not
dissimilar to the one that killed osama bin laden. you of all presidents, have become the lethal one, you of all people have turned out to be a man of proven integrity whose foreign and domestic policies are less popular than your proven willingness to kill in defense of your country, even your own countrymen, indeed to kill, even a 16-year-old american boy, accused of no crimes at all. wow. tom, welcome. where do we begin? we should start with some of these specific cases. >> right. >> at some point because you are describing a president that many would say they didn't vote for. >> right. yeah. i think that, of course, has been one of the biggest surprises of the obama presidency, is its willingness to carry out lethal operations and expand the use of lethal operations. >> expand them ek potentially? >> i don't know if the math works out but pretty close. >> dan senor, i'm reading this piece of the article and you're looking concerned.
why? >> i'm actually struck because the reaction to what tom's article talks about is muted in congress among members of president obama's party. an amazing -- imagine what would have been the case had he written the same article about president bush and what the reaction would have been in congress. >> it's muted in his party but also muted in the other party because the republican party has been for this the whole time. in fact, right now, i mean really, their only objection to it is on the level of okay, obama is leaking this, sort of to make himself more popular. >> or as a standalone is not a national security strategy, and just have a strategy about counter terrorism and drone attacks. >> the republicans i spoke to are pretty much all in favor of capture and interrogation. saying this is essentially replaced capture and interrogation. >> what it shows is you can -- democrats are making this case about counterinsurgency for the last several years.
this president is executing on it which your article points out. we can save money, not putting boots on the ground and not only save money but save lives in the process of killing and capturing those. i think the president has been -- they've done some talking about this, but it's equally surprising to me to dan's point that republicans aren't giving the president credit for these efforts. i wonder your response because -- >> i think many republicans feel -- >> is it politics? >> many feel if this is part of a more comprehensive approach to dealing with national security and terrorism that's one thing. as a standalone policy it's not sufficient. it's hard to gather intelligence if you're not actually capturing human beings and interrogating them. if you're not capturing them and interrogating them and simply killing them, you actually -- that is a standalone policy is not a strategy. >> let's get to the degree of difficulty in the differentiation between capture and kill. degree of difficulty in capturing, first of all the difficulty of capturing and if you capture what do you do with
them? where do you send them? >> that's the whole problem. that has been the republican objection to this thing. we don't have a place, we don't have a detention place where they can go on. the -- really the one sort of notable detention thaton. the one notable detention is when we finally take this guy and ship him around the indian ocean for a few months. >> explain the stories. who is the 16-year-old boy? >> the 16-year-old boy we concentrate on issan war al a lackey's son. he knew his father was on the kill list and went in search of his father and ironically or tragically he was killed by a drone strike while essentially being with another group of 8-year-old teens.
he was like his father, an american citizen and unlike his father, accused of an american crime. >> explain the two types of drone strikes. >> the profile strike is a strike that's based on human intelligence where they track a certain guy on the kill list or whatever. a signature strike is a modelling strike where they use data to look at the movements of the associations of someone and decide to kill them. >> that was a profile strike? >>an war was the profile strike, someone they were after from the star. adbul, nobody knows what kind of strike it was. on esquire.com, they said there is no information about the killing of this american citizen.
that is where we are really in murky waters. >> do you sense with president obama that he came into office as candidate obama with one perspective and he dramatically changed on this particular point once he got in? or do you feel that he always had this? >> this was his vision from the start that he executed. >> he never articulated the vision. >> he was asked about pakistan. we could find bin laden. the specific question. he said he would be willing to act. he certainly gave us a sense of how strong it would be. i would agree that the posture was not president obama would be this assertive and controversial in how he is going about it. >> it doesn't seem controversial. >> no, there is controversy around -- i'm a firm believener what he is doing. if you give me the option, we can stop that person. i think it's a good thing.
i support the person, but there was some. >> one thing is -- >> should he have been killed? they all say it's collateral damage, but they have given us zero information about the killing. zero. >> so many issues of morality. >> that's the controversy. >> we live in a country where 99.99% of the people have no idea how messy war really is. this is an anti-septic thing we are talking about. it's messy on the ground. >> this is an effort to make war less messy and there moral issues. messy from our side. >> tom juneau, thank you so much. you are watching "morning joe" brewed by starbucks.
mid grade dark roast forest fresh full tank brain freeze cake donettes rolling hot dogs bag of ice anti-freeze wash and dry diesel self-serve fix a flat jumper cables 5% cashback signup for 5% cashback at gas stations through september. it pays to discover. [ wife ] your dad's really giving him the business... the designated hitter's the best thing to happen to baseball! but it's not the same game! [ wife ] wow, he's really gonna get us a good deal. it's better! no it's not! the pitcher comes up and he's out! [ dealer ] he can bunt! whatever. but we're good with 0% apr for 60 months? oh, yeah, totally. thank you so much. that must've been brutal. [ male announcer ] the volkswagen autobahn for all event. at 0% apr for 60 months, no one needs to know how easy it was to get your new volkswagen. that's the power of german engineering.
delivering mail, medicine and packages. yet the house is considering a bill to close thousands of offices, slash service and layoff over 100,000 workers. the postal service is recording financial losses, but not for reasons you might think. the problem ? a burden no other agency or company bears. a 2006 law that drains $5 billion a year from post office revenue while the postal service is forced to overpay billions more into federal accounts. house bill 2309 is not the answer.
♪ i hear you... ♪ rocky mountain high ♪ rocky, rocky mountain high ♪ ♪ all my exes live in texas ♪ ♪ born on the bayou [ female announcer ] the perfect song for everywhere can be downloaded almost anywhere. ♪ i'm back, back in the new york groove ♪ [ male announcer ] the nation's largest 4g network.
covering 2,000 more 4g cities and towns than verizon. rethink possible. good morning. it's 8:00 on the east coast, 5:00 a.m. on the west coast. time to wake up as you take a live look at new york city. we have mike, dan, harold ford and steve rhettner. we have a new issue, an old one being revived by democrats and
republicans and i hope this time the president follows through on it. he will push for a one-year extension for bush era tax cuts for people making under $250,000. the move is on the heels of friday's disappointing jobs report which we will get to again as republicans pushed to extend the tax cuts for the middle and upper class. they framed tax strategy as one of the key differences between the president and mitt romney. >> we know what tax breaks and tax cuts for the wealthy and financial regulations mean. they mean ek nomtic calamity versus a vision where we add jobs and build out of the middle class and people take responsibility. they work hard and get ahead. >> i will start with you in terms of strategy. is this a winning one for the president given the differences between the candidates? >> it puts taxes back in the
forefront and allows the president to further frame this as an election about little class values and who is in a best position to represent the values. if you are a voter, this is the same conversation we had over the last few years. you will listen and criticize and you don't extend it for all you will hurt the job creators and democrats say it's about the middle class. you would much rather argue for the middle class. it's a small win for the president politically, but opens the door for the president and his team to compromise perhaps on something more than what they are expected or anticipated, meaning they may offer some reductions in the capital gains and dividend tax and some relief for higher earners, not going all the way back, but compromising. >> it emphasizes the division and the struggling middle class.
it might be an opportunity for the president and the democrats to steve ratner and a look at the republicans. having said that, it is about jobs. we had disappointing jobs reports out. what would this do and could the republicans argue that it could hurt job growth. >> you can argue that cutting taxes adds jobs. that's the fundamental basic economic theory, but all of this is taking place against a much bigger backdrop. the politics that this is basically a lot of political theater where democrats are trying to stake out their view of the world. the large backdrop is the fiscal cliff coming at the end of this year. none of what we are talking about today is going to happen in the short run. it's a large debate at the end of the year about how to avoid the fiscal cliff and taxes play a large part in that equation. >> hit me with it. what are the republicans trying
to repeal obama care which is not going to happen. how do they get around looking like they want to say no to everything and get in the way of progress. >> they put in a number of votes between now and the august recess. they can call them political, about you they are real votes on real issues. >> like the disclosure act and the tax reform issues like repealing obama care. mitt romney said if he is elected president on day one he will do certain things like issuing an executive order like allowing states to get out of obama care like o peeling the keystone pipeline. he is talking about specific things he will do and president obama is against doing. the campaign has been interesting to watch. it has been a lot of character assassination and attacks on issues that seem to be distractions from the campaign. the reality is that president obama and governor romney have different views on very big
issues. they are going to be debated and votes on these issues in congress asking members on both sides to stake out where they stand. >> why do i think that the fairness factor on the tax code might eventually overlap every other economic issue with the exception of employment. the fairness factor and the middle class -- you have been taking it and getting hosed on the tax code and rich people getting away with a lot. the fairness factor. >> the fairness issue has worked effectively for a period of time. i am not convinced that it overtakes all of the other things. the jobs issue that you touched on is more important. the question is if your tax rate stays where it is, are you willing to vote for the president again if he said i will take on the wealthiest in the country. i never have been a fan of that
kind of approach. i think that this argument -- >> why? >> if the 99% and 1% argument always worked, we democrats would win every election. people want more. people don't believe the wealthiest should get away with not paying taxes or get away with tax breaks and deductions. if you offer what the president will offer and look forward to doing that, we should offer a broader reform. let's do this to avoid what steve touched on. in longer term, let's reform the tax code in a broader more comprehensive. >> if they at least hit the people over $250,000 a year, it would bring in $850 billion over ten years, not that much, but it feeds into the republican's arguments. >> what does it do to where we
are today? $850 billion is a huge amount of money. >> mitt romney is arguing about the tax mandate thing, a $7 billion item. this is $850 billion. this is real money. that's why the president is proposing it. whether we implement it on january 1st or later, you can talk about the growth, but taxes have to go up on the wealthy. this house republican proposal is a house republican proposal. mitt romney has a proposal to cut taxes 20% for everybody. >> and close loopholes. >> that he refused to specify any of so far. this is all going to be on the election. >> you have six democratic
senators who are for extension. >> all of the bush tax cuts? >> four of the six up for reelection. president clinton has been clear. >> they are considering it. they are being pressured. >> president clinton came out for extension of the bush tax cuts. this is not just republicans on the wrong side. >> in fairness. >> i have two other guys who can talk about it. >> if the president and his administration has three more monthly jobs reports, nobody is going to be caring about this. >> i would agree. in 2010, my team argued we should extend on those making below 250 and those above 250 should be higher. we didn't win the election. there was the health care and jobs issues. it didn't prevail for us. the concern i have is what a lot
of incumbent democrats have. how do you differentiate between these two with a borage of ads and criticism saying in a slow down -- >> does this issue help differentiate between the two? i have two other gentlemen who can take on each other. they are here to talk about something they are working together on. >> we are not interested in working together. they can fight and go down the street. >> just wait. from washington joining us now, former republican governor of mississippi and former chairman of the national committee haley barber and green tech automotive chairman and wonder if he is running for governor. terry mcauliffe. first, who should i lead go first? haley or terry?
haley? terry? haley barber, explain to me why tax cuts on the rich can't be rescinded at least temporarily. >> the united states is in a global battle for capital and labor. we have the highest corporate tax rate in the world and the obama administration is part of obama care is increasing the capital gains tax by 25%. if we are trying to attack capital to hire more people and deploy technology and improve benefits, where do you think that $850 billion you were going to talk about is going to go? it goes to the government instead of going for more employees and higher wages and for expanding the economy. that's pretty simple. >> it is? i'm not sure it's that simple. i will let terry argue with you. would you agree with haley
barber on this? >> we are in agreement on the global economy and the reason why we are sitting here today, i unveil and rolled out the first car. i went to china two years ago and bought the most advanced company and moved it to the united states of america and on friday we had 1,000 folks at the factory opening. it was a great roll out. we have to get back to manufacturing. we can't be a service economy. we have to make things here in america. we are making cars and shipping them to denmark. it's a great american success story, but it took us working together. this wasn't a political issue. we invested hundreds of millions in the company. he wanted jobs and i wanted a great work environment and incentives to make money. we caming to and that's what the american public did. how did we get the country moving together? we have to get the partisan politics. i am cot peting against china every day.
i bought a company and moved in here. we have to get in the game in the united states of america. in this partisan fighting we are having here in washington, right now is not doing anything to create jobs women need a policy that incentivizes to create jobs here in the united states of america and compete in the global economy. i am here because he had the best deal. mississippi said i want manufacturing. >> let me say that he said mississippi offered the best deal, almost everything was tax incentives. they were tax credits. if they are successful, we reduce their taxes. that speaks volumes and the question you asked me to start this section of the show. >> interesting. >> governor barber, as you know, this is cable. let's get back to the contentiousne contentiousness. >> they won't do it. >> we have enough of them being best friends. take me into the romney campaign and defend his position on the
affordable care act. it's almost the exact same bill passed by the massachusetts legislature and campioned by then governor romney. how does he go back and forth? >> let's start off by recognizing something. every state has mandatory car insurance fchl you own an automobile, you have to inhusur it. the federal government doesn't have that power because the founding father his one king and they didn't want another one. they didn't want to give the federal government that power and they didn't. the fact that they mandate in a state is not unusual. we wouldn't have it in mississippi and they passed it in massachusetts. if they works for massachusetts,
that's their business. the vast majority of states don't want it. it's clearly within the realm of the powers of massachusetts and frankly a lot of us believe different states would be the best ways to look at the alternatives for reforming health care rather than trying to impose this top down solution. we have 13,000 pages of regulation that said it will go to 40? >> how good are you? >> he is always good. he had me when he was talking about certain senators he thought should be in the republican party. >> it's a house ditch video. do you have a point you want to make? i wanted to share something about the initiative you two were working on. >> i was going to say about the initiative, the chief executives, we get elected to get the job done. i am a republican and i had a
democrat legislature for seven years and one year house alone. terry is a democratic national chairman and brought to mississippi jobs, a very innovative company in a sector that we are focused on. automotive. also energy which is one of our prominent sectors that we are trying to agree in mississippi. my job is to get the job done. we need more of that in the united states rather than how can we be more contentious. >> terry mcauliffe, are you running for governor of virginia? >> i just opened this plant on friday and working on a big wood palette operation. i am trying to do what i said and i ran on a campaign of big ideas and what we need to do to get the economy doing. if you don't want to vote for me, don't. and they didn't. i had a great time running. the important thing is of all
this, we have to have job creation back here in america. you look at the joblessness and the loss of manufacturing, that's what we have get to bring back. as i say, we will now by the end of next year have 1,000 new employees directly in mississippi. the indirect is about 7,000 jobs impacted. i want to do it in other states, but the governor has to be up front. it has to be good for the state. everyone was so intrigued and we had so many this weekend. that's not the point. the point is what's the best deal for mississippi and my company? we can all work together. that's what america should be about. we should be buying american products and supporting workers in a bipartisan way. >> the 1,000 new employees forecast over the next years, will they have health care? >> they do. we have a great benefit package.
450 poeople in mississippi. i know you have a couple of cars and a $60 million plant under construction. we are building them to mississippi and third for the company, no one goes to china and buys manufacturing and brings it back. an 18 million square foot plant in china. the deal is all the parts will be made in the united states of america by u.s. workers and shipped to china. we are trying to do things revolutionarily different than we have done. no federal government money. we can do this. we can beat these countries around the world. i am sick and tired of them stealing our technology and our jobs. if it's our technology, sell it to the americans. >> coming up next. off the paper trial the details of how corporations are pumping millions of dollars while
keeping donations completely anonymous. editor of the national memo.com and richard wolf. from covert affairs on the usa network. piper par abo. first todd with a look at the forecast. >> improving conditions around the d.c. area. a quick look at the radar across the mid-atlantic and the northeast. quiet for now. we will see a chance for more thunderstorms to fire up. south of philly during the daytime and d.c. could see activity to the south towards richmond and norfolk. at least for now looking good and a chance for severe storms. a slight risk extending into the carolinas and hail and the stronger thunderstorms this afternoon. here's a look at temperatures. 78 in philly and beautiful conditions temperature-wise.
especially last weekend and 80s and 90s. there is a quick look across the rest of the country with showers ex- te-10ing into the heartland. a lot cooler than this time last week. more "morning joe" coming up next. blan this is the first car that i've been totally in love with in every way, shape, and form. it's my dream vehicle. on a day to day basis, i am not using gas. my round trip is approximately 40 miles to work. head on home, stop at the grocery store, whatever else that i need to do -- still don't have to use gas. i'm never at the gas station unless i want some coffee.
millions to influence the election. according to the new york times and the front page article yesterday, corporations are o voiding super pacs, instead giving to tax-exempt groups that don't have the same disclosure. according to the times makes a full reporting on the electoral process impossible. the times found that companies like aetna, dow chemical and american electric power are donating to the tax-exempt organizations because they are classified as social welfare groups. joining us now, the coauthor of the article and the political reporter and the table, the editor of national memo.com. in washington, msnbc analyst richard wolf. fairly one-sided. >> these guys did the reporting and i will respond to the reporting.
>> for does seem ridiculous and i would love mitch to come on the show. he has written an article in "usa today" about the disclose act fighting for transparency on this level. a lot of democrats are pushing for this. he believes that in protection of free speech, the disclose act should not go forward. that's a complete joke. >> it marks a shift in taking on the conservative side. it used to be we should have as much money as you want in the system, but full disclosure and the ipt-electual shift on more places. connell always felt this way. all the money in the world and no disclosure that opens up people to retaliation or boycotts or tax or pressure. the essence is giving money and giving money secretly. >> explain how this works and joe jumped in. it's under the tax code section 501 c 4. the bottom line is what some.
>> 501 c 4 can do some politics, but it is not meant to be a full time political organization which is why it's tax-exempt. >> social welfare. >> the promotion of broad community interests, that's not highly well-define and it's all kind of a mish mash and they are very unclear in a lot of ways. there is in fact no clear bright line test for what is too much political activity. it's a loose system and people exploit that and put a lot of money into groups. the ads are educational ads. >> when someone asked karl rove if he is a social welfare advocate, he has become one. social welfare advocacy is attacking president obama over taxes on tv. that is how he seems to define what the social welfare spending
with the cross roads. the other thing that nick mentioned is the shift with the republicans on disclosure fascinating. on the citizens united controlling decisions, they promised full disclosure and said if you have full disclosure, you don't have to worry about corruption. they don't want full disclosure and maybe we should worry about corruption. >> cross roads, they did a statement. i will read it. individuals and organizations having first amendment rights to promote beliefs through advertising. be that against the iraq war or climate change or in the case of cross roads for free markets and limited government. nick, is that what they have been doing? >> they have a right to do that, but do they also have a right to a tax exemption to raise it and spend it? >> secretly. >> it is educational on taxes. we are educating voters on
important issues of the day. >> sure. >> the test for the irs. if look at what the group is doing as a whole, is it about education? >> richard wolf, jump in. dan? >> they are wealthy figures on the left. >> absolutely. >> they can give away tens of millions. your papers and editorials to the super pacs, what does this one want? was there this level of scrutiny about those on the left? some of them were very controversial who gave away huge amounts of money to candidacies. >> plenty of scrutiny. they had plenty of scrutiny in 2004. >> as a matter of fact when it was in an activist stage of his dealings find those groups very heavily after 2004 because they were abusing the tax code.
that's why the groups are not really as active this time. there is a blow back there and the 501 c 4 route is safer. >> let's get richard wolf in here. jump in. >> i hear what nick is saying on the tax exemption side, but if corporations want to spend the money, they will find a way. they don't need a special vehicle to do it. obviously there tax advantages. first of all, we don't have an sec. it's not a paper tiger. you don't have concern or oversight from investors. they should be worried about misuse of their own money. thirdly, there is a political aspect to it which is relevant. this happened in previous election, but theyally paul al compare to what we are seeing.
is it an advantage or disadvantage? is there an opening for a teddy roosevelt style politics of going against the big corporations and the trust-busting square deal approach or alternatively is the romney campaign approach in tune? aspirational side to this. people want to be successful like there is people driving up to the mansions in the hamptons. >> let me ask you about the groups we are talking about. i am the ceo of a large insurance company. health insurance. is it possible for me to take $3 million out of my company's pack and give it to this group and say i don't want fingerprints on this, but i want you to use this money to kill health care. >> the pac is a committee so you can take your corporate money and put it into one of the charitable groups or the tax-exempt groups.
as richard pointed out, the chamber of commerce is a large group and they have been the favored route for the money. they are a different 501 c and a trait association. eatna did give $3 million or $4 million. while the president said we support the bill, the chamber and other groups who had aetn ama money. >> they brought up the point and joe raised it. it's a fair argument. if we are going to have transparency, we should call for it on both sides. has it been more on the right? >> we all knew what george soros did. he was looking at dozens and dozens of figures. the amount of money is out of proportion. you are looking realistically at
the super pacs that out spend the romney campaign and we haven't seen that before. everyone said money and politics has always been there. this is a different world. obviously progressives don't like the in balance, but they is secrety and the amount of influence and the unlimited spending are all very, very new. there should be scrutiny for everyone. absolutely. i don't see a problem with that. >> jeffrey has given $2 million to obama super pac and peter lewis has given. there is more than one george soros. they just don't get the attention. is it an issue in the campaign? >> do we think voters at this point have economic anxiety are going to be focused on this issue? >> i don't think so. campaign finance has been an issue and that's abstract. it's hard to get people to talk about it and think about it.
people have jobs to worry about and health care and there issues that i think are more visceral to people. >> the reason it will be an issue in the campaign if it does is because it plays into the bigger themes about mitt romney that he is an out of touch person in bed with all the other who is show up at the hamptons in their mercedes and think the vips should run the country. >> george clooney's home in los angeles for the fund-raiser who raised millions. are they in touch with middle america? >> the people who are funning romney want something from him. they want their taxes cut. what does jeffrey katzen berg want? >> they are investigating him due it a movie deal he did in china. i am simply saying the idea that donors on the left are pure and
motivated by the issues and donors on the right are motivated solely by personal advantage? >> they wanted copyright changes and as you know, they didn't get them. they got the opposite. that's a big business. >> does anyone know if there has been a presidential election where the incumbent is outraised? >> i'm sure it hasn't happened before in modern times. it's very possible -- forget super pacs. it's possible that mitt romney will outraise barack obama. >> what are the numbers so far? >> he had a great month. $106 million for mitt romney and the rnc in june. i'm not sure what barack obama's numbers are yet. it's not going to be that high. obama has been raising lots of money for a year and a half and mitt romney is now getting the benefit of being the nominee.
i expect him to clean up the money and bring it into the campaign and he will have good months. he will be competitive on cash with barack obama. >> final thoughts? >> it was this moment in 2008 where john mccain couldn't remember how many properties he or didn't want to admit how many he had. that was not a big deal, about you it tied together the question that a lot of independent voter his. why does this guy talk about economic policies and the economic situation the way he did? the danger for romney is this aura of wealth and fund-raising ties together his personal story that people don't yet fully understand. >> thank you. stick around if you can. coming up, she is back for season three of the hit usa show covert affairs.
this is new york state. we built the first railway, the first trade route to the west, the greatest empires. then, some said, we lost our edge. well today, there's a new new york state. one that's working to attract businesses and create jobs. a place where innovation meets determination... and businesses lead the world. the new new york works for business. find out how it can work for yours at thenewny.com. according to ford, the works fuel saver package could literally pay for itself. jim twitchel is this true? yes it's true. how is this possible? proper tire inflation, by using proper grades of oil, your car runs more efficiently, saves gas. you could be doing this right now? yes i could, mike. i'm slowing you down? yes you are. my bad. the works fuel saver package. just $29.95 or less after rebate. only at your ford dealer. so, to sum up, you take care of that, you take care of these, you save a bunch of this. that works.
ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 let's talk about the cookie-cutter retirement advice ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 you get at some places. ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 they say you have to do this, have that, invest here ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 you know what? ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 you can't create a retirement plan based on ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 a predetermined script. ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 at charles schwab, we actually take the time to listen - ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 to understand you and your goals... ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 ...so together we can find real-life answers for your ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 real-life retirement. ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 talk to chuck ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 and let's write a script based on your life story. ttd#: 1-800-345-2550
>> of those, even less. here's my pitch. i think you were being underutilized. i am doing whey signed on for. that's what you are supposed to say, but it's [ bleep ]. you seem to know a lot about me. not in a creepy way, but yeah. >> 40 past the hour. that was a scene from the hit show covert affairs. that makes its season premier tomorrow on the usa network. joining us now, the star of the show. piper perabo. >> go ride ahead. >> you get a lot of that on "morning joe." you last year did the season finally in stockholm. i just got back yesterday. it is so beautiful there. >> i didn't know anything about that city. >> take us back to the season finales. we are here to shamelessly plug
your show. why were you on stockholm? >> i ended up on a mission with my sister who i found out they worked for the cia and i ran through the city. as the season premier opens, a very tragic event begins the season and i end up in mare kesh. >> you traveled all over the world for the show. what is the budget of this show? >> i don't know. i try not to ask. >> last week. >> that's a good question though. it's amazing like that. a number of terrific shows that are on places like usa network and as opposed to the obvious. the big nbc. >> that's where you go and find great shows.
>> they do them in the summer. when a lost shows take their break, something is happening. >> tell us about your character. last time you were here, you are describing the physicality of the job. how has she developed along the way? >> the show takes place in her job at the cia. this is her third year and she is starting to get more autonomy. >> for looks like a very physical job. >> they let me have more power and we are traveling so much this year as i started to build my clientele. >> how is the show doing in terms of -- who is the viewer? >> i think we get a wide variety of viewers. a lot of them is it's about a young woman who is balancing her career and family and the challenges of that if you have a demanding career. i can relate to it. >> the viewers are young women?
>> they dvr it because it was on for so late. that's who talks to me about the show. >> i would think guys watch. i am leaping here. >> i watched it. >> you have to crank him away. i don't know why. >> i watched it. >> you have? >> yes. >> and be honest and blunt and brutal. >> before i would be honest and blunt, your career path trajectory is a difficult business to crash into. now you get your own tv series which is huge. you are very young. how did this happen? >> i went to college which i am proud of my paraphernalias to push me to do. i moved to new york and did the classic thing. i was a waitress and auditioning and got a film and just kept working and working. you move to new york with your
coffee pot. >> how old are you? are. >> 34. >> oh, my gosh. you actually are holding on pretty good. >> it's a lot of eye cream. >> it's a really, really tough business. where do you want to go with this? >> i like that the show is progressing. originally doug liman was the producer and he was doing the show about valerie plame wilson and met her and talked to her and i liked the idea of following the true career path of what it is to be a woman as you advance and more and more danger and the more information and higher level security and how that affects your decisions. that could have a role. >> you get a lot of feedback from women and a lot of women are watching you and like your character and the dynamics of her. you can me what it's like to be a woman on television and doing the show and what the industry is like for you.
some of the pressures and maybe unexpected challenges thaw might be confronting? >> it's a lot of work and it's a long work day. i think about that and if you do a 12 or 15 hour day and how often you see a family starts to take a back seat. >> do you have a family? >> i don't yet. >> do you want? >> i do. i talk to women in the business about how they balance that. >> it is a challenge. take a look at this. do you recognize this? this is sunset in stockholm. look how beautiful the moon is. season three of covert affairs starts tomorrow. taken from my iphone at 10:00 p.m. piper perabo. come back soon. coming up, the earnings season kicks off and how much will the euros weigh on american companies. a preview of the week ahead on wall street. that's next on "morning joe." the medicare debate continues in washington...
you've earned the right to know. ♪ ...so what does it mean for you and your family? [ female announcer ] you've earned the facts. ♪ washington may not like straight talk, but i do. [ female announcer ] and you've earned a say. get the facts and make your voice heard on medicare and social security at earnedasay.org. on medicare and social security mid grade dark roast forest fresh full tank brain freeze cake donettes rolling hot dogs bag of ice anti-freeze wash and dry diesel self-serve fix a flat jumper cables 5% cashback signup for 5% cashback at gas stations through september. it pays to discover.
thought they were dead. huh? [ male announcer ] should've used roundup. it kills weeds to the root, so they don't come back. roundup. no root. no weed. no problem. i knew it'd be tough on our retirement savings, especially in this economy. but with three kids, being home more really helped. man: so we went to fidelity. we talked about where we were and what we could do. we changed our plan and did something about our economy. now we know where to go for help if things change again. call or come in today to take control of your personal economy. get free one-on-one help from america's retirement leader.
time for business before the bell. brian sullivan, broin, did you miss me? >> not really. >> i didn't miss you either. >> i know you didn't miss me one bit. i heard your previous interview and over the weekend i eliminated all channels except those by comcast and nbc. nothing else worth watching. >> that will be helpful. >> we are trying. it's a big week. earnings can be boring, but this can be a big week and a big season. the big companies, mcdonald's, ge and getting whacked by the fiscal cliff. the president will make his push for leading tax cuts expire.
a story right up you guy's alley. british airways gave up ipads to his cabin cruise so they can google people. i guess if they were important. they say who is this? they know you are a global international superstar and treat you with sufficient respect. >> they believe all the garbage on google too. you are in trouble. >> just google crazy, okay. morning papers are next. daddy, come in the water!
somebody didn't book with travelocity, with 24/7 customer support to help move them to the pool daddy promised! look at me, i'm swimming! somebody, get her a pony! [ female announcer ] the travelocity guarantee. from the price to the room to the tp you'll never roam alone. ♪ home of the brave. ♪ it's where fear goes unwelcomed... ♪ and certain men... find a way to rise above. this is the land of giants. ♪
>> time to take a look at the morning papers. the "los angeles times" reports ernest borgnine has died. he was 95 years old. >> the "las vegas sun" reports attempted murder charge after a televised debate turns violent. they accused of incumbent of buying his way into parliament and he threw a shoe and then pulled a gun. the moderator separated the two and no one was hurt. we never had someone pull a gun on the set. we had disruptions. >> maybe we are not doing so bad
here. the daily mail has the story of a chinese acro bat who attempted to cross the tight rope while walking backwards behind folded. >> watch this. easy. one step at a time. whoa! >> he fell about 130 feet. suffering only minor injuries. each getting up and walking after the fall. who does that? >> not me. >> up next, what if anything did we learn today?
well hello, welcome to hotels.com. summer road trip, huh? uhuh yep uch let's find you a room. at hotels.com, you'll always find the perfect hotel. because we only do hotels. wow. i like that. nice no. laugh... awe uch ooh, yeah hmm nice huh book it! oh boy call me... this summer, we're finding you the perfect place - plus giving you up to $100 at hotels.com
time to talk about what we learned today. >> i leaned in all of the eulogies and bits about ernest borgnine they almost always fail to mention one of the his best movies. >> there it is. it is mentioned now. >> joe? >> i learned that one of our greatest social welfare advocates is karl rove. >> he is. he really is. >> who knew? >> that's the way to look at it. >> do you think you are okay? >> i'm all right. >> do you need help? i might come in and do the weather. >> i'm going to do that tomorrow. way too early. >> i learned that i survived a